Panel recommends OSHA not pursue new rule for crystalline silica.

In December, after the 60-day Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) process had been completed, the Small Business Advocacy Review (SBAR) panel, consisting of OSHA officials, the Small Business Administration's (SBA) chief counsel for advocacy, representatives from the Office of Management and Budget and the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, recommended that OSHA not pursue a new rule regarding exposure limits to crystalline silica.

In the silica exposure rule proposed by OSHA, the agency asked the SBAR panel to consider a draft rule that contained three options for crystalline silica's permissible exposure level (PEL): 50 [micro]g/[m.sup.3]; 75 [micro]g/[m.sup.3]; and 100 [micro]g/[m.sup.3]--all of which would be measured as an 8-hr, time-weighted average exposure. The current PEL for crystalline silica is 100 [micro]g/[m.sup.3]. In addition, the draft rule suggested methods of compliance that contain rules for monitoring and respiratory protection.

Under law, agencies such as OSHA are required to gather input from effected industries when regulations may have a significant impact on small businesses. Small business representatives have the opportunity to review draft regulatory language, assess the potential impact on affected industries and recommend less burdensome alternatives. Foundry representatives outlined concerns about OSHA's cost analysis and the excessive administrative burdens associated with this rule at a time when most metalcasting facilities are struggling to remain competitive in the global marketplace. The SBAR panel reviewed all of the comments and finished drafting its report to OSHA in December.

The SBAR panel stated in its report that, "OSHA gives consideration to the alternative of improved enforcement of, and expanded outreach for, the existing rule rather than a new rule. In addition, the panel recommends that OSHA carefully study the effects of existing compliance and outreach efforts, such as the Special Emphasis Program on Silica, with a view to better delineating the effects of such efforts. This examination should include a year-by-year analysis of the extent of noncompliance discovered in OSHA inspections and the kinds of efforts OSHA made to improve enforcement and outreach."

However, the panel hedged somewhat and stated that while it is recommending there not be any new rule, if one is put forward by OSHA, "the panel recommends that, if there is to be a standard, OSHA consider and solicit comment on maintaining the existing PEL. The panel also recommends that OSHA examine each of the ancillary provisions such as additional health screening on a provision-by-provision basis in light of the comments of the SERs on the costs and lack of need for some of these provisions."